Amador supervisors pause bidding on Pine Grove SR‑88 corridor project amid funding and community concerns

The Amador County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 14 agreed to delay advertising the Invitation to Bid (ITB) for the State Route 88 Pine Grove Corridor Improvement Project, a scaled‑down safety and pedestrian project for Pine Grove, and asked staff to return with more information about funding restrictions and options.

The discussion — the meeting’s longest — centered on whether to proceed with the project as currently scoped and funded. Richard Vila, Amador County public works director, said the project has been narrowed to reduce cost and is now ready for bid. "The engineer's estimate on this is $7,125,000," Vila told the board, and he said available funding for the project is approximately $9,800,000. Vila said bids were scheduled to be received March 13, 2025, and that construction, if awarded, could run into spring 2026.

Why it matters: the project uses a mix of local, state and federal funds that, County and Amador County Transportation Commission (ACTC) staff warned, could be reclaimed by the state if the project does not proceed through required phases in a timely way. John Gedney, representing ACTC, said the funding package is “complicated” and described a multi‑year closeout and accounting process that can delay or prevent re‑use of funds: "It takes a while… after the project is completed, then you go through the closeout process," Gedney said, citing the recent example of residual CMAQ funds that were returned at the Plymouth Roundabout closeout several years after that project finished.

Supervisors and members of the public raised multiple concerns: residents questioned the value of replacing sidewalks where sidewalks already exist, the project’s usefulness to the walking public, whether the school driveway changes would solve the known ingress problem at Pine Grove Elementary, potential maintenance responsibilities for replaced sidewalks, and the political risk of investing county resources in a state highway facility.

Jerry Poor, a Pine Grove resident who identified himself as a citizen of Pine Grove, told the board: "I just don't see any positive reason to proceed with this project… we're just throwing money at something that isn't a solution." He urged the supervisors to stop spending the county’s and state’s money on a project the town does not broadly support.

Board decision and next steps: After public comment and staff responses, the board chose not to direct staff to advertise the ITB at this meeting. A supervisor moved to table the advertising action until the next meeting; staff will return with a more focused agenda item that lays out the county’s options, potential penalties or fund lapses, and the path to challenge or negotiate with Caltrans/CTC/Caltrans headquarters and the California Transportation Commission about retaining funds locally. Supervisors also asked ACTC staff to pursue a meeting in Sacramento with decision‑makers to seek clarity about whether funds could be redirected to other Amador projects.

Background and context: The Pine Grove project has been in development for many years. Vila and ACTC staff told the board that roughly $7.1 million has already been spent on preliminary engineering, environmental work, right‑of‑way and utility coordination for the project. Board members and staff said the project was originally larger and more expensive; it was progressively scaled back to fit available funding.

What remains unresolved: the board did not vote to cancel the project, nor did it award or reject construction contracts. Supervisors asked staff to return with a clearer funding risk analysis — including which specific pots of money (federal, state, RIP shares, CMAQ, STIP or local funds) might be lost if the county abandons the project — and to report on options to pursue retained funding for other local projects such as Fiddletown Road.

The board scheduled the item to be discussed at a subsequent meeting with a reconfigured staff report and requested that ACTC officials help arrange in‑person discussions with the state to seek a definitive answer about fund reallocation possibilities.

Ending: With the item continued, the board left open both the option to proceed to bid and the option to try to reclaim or redirect funding for other county road projects; staff and ACTC will return with clarified legal, financial and scheduling information before the board makes a final decision.